One of Marie’s troubles, the psychoanalyst Stephen Mitchell might have said, is that she seemed hooked on safety. Marriage typically meets our sharply felt needs for security and predictability, he argues, but in those relationships that last well, people take the leap of believing that they actually don’t know exactly who the other person is or what he or she is capable of ”” the absolute knowingness is a fantasy, anyway ”” and that there is new terrain to be discovered. So, out of deference to Marie’s fascination with the Civil War, Clem was planning a summer trip to visit some battle sites with her. And maybe, if Marie would dare risk it, Clem could get caught up in the history of the era, too. And maybe, after watching her husband traverse the grassy fields of Antietam, she’d even want to sleep with him, if she could bear him being anything other than dependable old Clem. (Not incidentally, Clem was as enamored of stability as his wife. When I spoke to him outside of the group, he told me one moment of his yearning for Marie to “roll over and kiss” him in bed. The next, he said that she met perhaps his top requirement for a wife: She’d never “stray or look at other men or have an affair. Marie’s true to me, and that’s one of the things I wanted, and that’s what I got.”)
From the NY Times Magazine: Can This Marriage Be Saved?
Posted in * Culture-Watch, Marriage & Family
I’m struck how much work and faith people put into this communication tool and “soft skills” class when it is SO obvious that Marie is chronically depressed! Get that poor child some kind of seratonin uptake inhibitor now! That therapist is guilty of malpractice if she didn’t realize that.
Seriously, most of the real lasting progress made in the realm of changing people’s thinking, habits, and personalities in the mental health arena has been pharmacological. There is a place for therapy, but long term success is rare and not particularly efficacious.
Then again, I always thought managing expectations was important in marriage as well (after 21 years, I’ve made literally every mistake a man can make) even though I couldn’t put it nearly as nicely as old Jack:
And thank God for that!
KTF….mrb
I am struck by a lack of description that should otherwise accompany what both the author and therapist would suggest as the “marriage ideal” for Clem and Marie. If they have build the life described, including an apparently charming home and two good children, what is the reason for therapy other than Marie’s possible depression (which, as already noted, might be better addressed by some good anti-depressants.)
[blockquote] Seriously, most of the real lasting progress made in the realm of changing people’s thinking, habits, and personalities in the mental health arena has been pharmacological. [/blockquote]
That’s not true. Studies consistently have shown that a combination of pharmacological treatment and psychotherapy is more effective than either one is alone, and some studies have shown psychotherapy (particularly cognitive-behavioral approaches) alone can be more affective than medication alone for depressive disorders.
[blockquote] Get that poor child some kind of seratonin uptake inhibitor now! That therapist is guilty of malpractice if she didn’t realize that. [/blockquote]
Do we know what services Marie is receiving besides this couples therapy? Maybe she is already on antidepressant meds. Maybe she refuses to take them (a lot of folks refuse pharmacological treatment for mood disorders). And that’s assuming this really is a case of major depressive disorder, which can’t be determined without a detailed history. If mood disturbances can be attributed to a particular physiological or lifestyle condition, it is not considered major depressive disorder.
Sorry to go all psychology-geeky, but there’s too much misinformation out there as it is.
#3 Adam from Tn: Glad to hear that therapy still works for people, agree that both in combination (drugs and therapy) work better than either alone. I’m no p-shrink, just track such things for a major insurance carrier. Our pharma outcomes for mental/nervous far outstrip anything we ever achieved in the pre-pharma days. Of course, with therapy and monitoring is a given in appropriate programs.
I was speaking above of the reluctance of many therapists (read: non-docs) to pass patients on to drug-prescribing psychiatrists (or even their GP’s) until long after the pharma solution was indicated. I reacted passionately, sorry for that. It just irritates me that people think mental illness is something to be ashamed of, when in many cases its simply a physiological problem with a chemical solution.
My 2 cents….mrb
Mike – no problem. I share your frustration with the stigma against mental illness, and I also am frustrated with the reluctance of some folks to use psychiatric meds. I understand the reluctance, and shared it for a long time, but antidepressant meds have literally saved my life.
As a counselor, I obviously am passionate about the subject as well. But I also don’t hesitate to suggest that a client seek psychiatric help when it is indicated. I do think that some practitioners (mostly GPs) over-prescribe psychiatric meds;e.g.,when my grandfather died, my mother’s GP offered to prescribe Prozac for her grief. But they do work well, and many people suffer needlessly for not seeking psychiatric treatment.
Anyway, I’m glad to have your analysis from tracking the data. And I enjoy having the conversation.
Adam
#5 Adam, no problem. Anti-dep’s actually saved my marriage, so I can relate. And I’m in agreement that GP’s are not the best at monitoring psy meds, they are too danged busy, its not the kind of thing you can handle in a 7 minute office visit once a month. Such is the system we have inherited so far. Let’s just keep plugging away at it, a bit at a time, and I think we can improve. That’s what we do all day at work.
KTF!….mrb